Overview

Valueboxes

kindergartens

2

dishes

129

ingredients

56

votes

216

Tabs

Dishes’ overview

For more details regarding ratings, calories and health, click on Food menu menu. For more details on the water used by ingredients and meals, click on Water menu. For details about CO2 emissions in transport and energy footprint, click on Energy menu. For a description of every variable and methods used to calculate them, visit About menu

Ratings’ details

Food

Ranking dishes

Ingredients’ usage

Meals’ details

Top rated Kindergartens

Most used ingredients

Top rated meals

Rating Correlations

Definitions

  • Calories: total calories in a dish, based on its ingredients and weights
  • Waste: ?
  • Rating (average): Average rating from parents and children for a particular dish. No specific criteria were provided to respondents, so ratings reflect individual’s perception regarding a particular dishes. Dishes can be rated by parents and childres using this tool.
  • Perceived health: Average of parents’ ratings on perceived health. High values do not necessarily mean that the meal is healthy.

Water

Valueboxes

wfp_animals

3,401.65 m3/Ton

wfp_crops

981.1 m3/Ton

wfp_animals_local

2,877.04 m3/Ton

wfp_crops_local

645.02 m3/Ton

Valueboxes

wfp_animals

85,041.3 m3/Ton

wfp_crops

79,468.71 m3/Ton

wfp_animals_local

71,926.01 m3/Ton

wfp_crops_local

34,185.94 m3/Ton

Water

Treemap

Ingredients

Meals

Ratings vs water footprint

Energy

Valueboxes

emissions_truck

1.47 kgCO2e/unit

emissinos_train

0.02 kgCO2e/unit

emissinos_ship

0.06 kgCO2e/unit

emissions_air

1.32 kgCO2e/unit

Tabs

Treemap

Dishes’ energy

Ratings vs energy footprint

Definitions and considerations

Food

  • Calories: total calories in a dish, based on its ingredients and weights
  • Waste: Amount of grams wasted food while preparing the meal.
  • Rating (average): Average rating from parents and children for a particular dish. No specific criteria were provided to respondents, so ratings reflect individual’s perception regarding a particular dishes. Dishes can be rated by parents and childres using this tool.
  • Perceived health: Average of parents’ ratings on perceived health. High values do not necessarily mean that the meal is healthy.

Water

Ingredients footprint:

  • Green: Green water footprint is water from precipitation that is stored in the root zone of the soil and evaporated, transpired or incorporated by plants. It is particularly relevant for agricultural, horticultural and forestry products. Units in m3/Ton
  • Blue: Blue water footprint is water that has been sourced from surface or groundwater resources and is either evaporated, incorporated into a product or taken from one body of water and returned to another, or returned at a different time. Irrigated agriculture, industry and domestic water use can each have a blue water footprint. Units in m3/Ton
  • Grey: Grey water footprint is the amount of fresh water required to assimilate pollutants to meet specific water quality standards. The grey water footprint considers point-source pollution discharged to a freshwater resource directly through a pipe or indirectly through runoff or leaching from the soil, impervious surfaces, or other diffuse sources. Units in m3/Ton
  • Total: Total water footprint, resulting from the sum of Green, Blue and Grey water footprint. Units in m3/Ton

Meals table:

  • Water footprint (World): Total water needed using world averages, resulting from summing all ingredient’s total water footprint. Units: m3. This measure is just for comparison purposes only, and does not reflect actual ingredients’ origin.
  • Water footprint (Poland): Total water needed if all ingredients were produced locally (if possible), resulting from summing all ingredient’s total water footprint. Units: m3. This measure is just for comparison purposes only, and does not reflect actual ingredients’ origin.
  • Water Used: Total water used, based on the actual origin of the ingredients. Results from the sum of ingredients’ actual footprint.Units: m3
  • Water Saving: Difference between the current choice of ingredients compared to the same ingredients using world averages. Negative values mean reduction of water and, therefore, are desirable.
  • Potential water Saving: Difference between the current choice of ingredients compared to the same ingredients being produced locally. Higher values represent greater room for improvement.

Energy

  • TonCO2 Emitted: Total of CO2 Tonnes emitted in transportation, based on the origin of the ingredients and means of transport. Units: TonCO2e

Considerations

  • Water footprint figures were obtained from https://waterfootprint.org/: The datasets are extremely comprehensive, but still, not all the ingredients used in Slupsk’s kindergartens are listed there.
  • Fishes’ water footprint is NULL
  • Not all crops can’t be cultivated in Poland

About

About this dashboard

An open source prototype for a visual interface to support research and Nexus engagements, designed collaborativelly as part of Creating interfaces’ WP4, developed by the Institute for Global Sustainable Development at the University of Warwick.

Aim

The aim of this tool is to provide an interface capable of understanding the implications of our decisions regarding food, and how can meals in kindergartens be turned into drivers for positive change for the health and the environment.

The visualisation tool may be helpful to perform tasks such as:

  • Identify highly rated meals and the lower rated meals
  • Identify meals with higher footprint
  • Identify ingredients with higher footprint

Which, ultimately, will lead to discussions and reflections on how food, energy and water are interlinked and how small changes in food can make a big impact.

Source Code